|
Re: thought-experiment
Stephen Barnard (steve@megafauna.com)
Thu, 19 Sep 1996 17:48:56 -0800
Len Piotrowski wrote:
>
> In article <51m76l$jn8@nic.umass.edu> edh@titan.oit.umass.edu (Ted) writes:
>
> >[snip]
>
> >Len Piotrowski (lpiotrow@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu) wrote:
> >: In article <51fo3i$26e6@argo.unm.edu> mycol1@unm.edu (Bryant) writes:
> >:
> >: >In article <m-pg0123.842738796@mrslate>,
> >: >Paul Gallagher <m-pg0123@mrslate.cs.nyu.edu> wrote:
> >:
> >: >The favored sociobiological/evolutionary psychological perspective, I think,
> >: >currently is that species-typical evolved psychological adaptations
> >: >generate a diversity of cultural elements in different ecological and
> >: >historical settings. You describe a behavioral genetics view above.
> >:
> >: How can there be an evolved generalized psychological adaptation for every
> >: ecological and historical settings known for human culture?
>
> >The ability to learn seems to be a good example of such a generalized
> >psychological adaptation. Granted, an individual's ability to learn must
> >be brought out and varies greatly with environment (including culture).
> >However, the fact that all humans can learn, while many animals can't,
> >indicates that the ability to learn is genetic.
>
> I don't think the ability to learn is on the sociobiological agenda.
I'm curious, Lenny. Have you ever heard of the Baldwin Effect?
Steve Barnard
|